[OSM-legal-talk] Substantial meaning
simon at bleah.co.uk
Fri Apr 24 01:01:03 BST 2009
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:42:33AM -0700, SteveC wrote:
> Basically, what do we feel substantial means when someone takes some
> part of the data? How much is 'substantial'? I won't frame the
> question further as I can see a number of ways and we, the license
> working group, would like to get a feel for the communities views.
> We're not looking for a legal opinion on that here, clearly case law
> one day has to play a role. Rather, what do we think it means?
I think it depends, which is quite unfortunate given that we’re trying
to come up with some sort of definition.
I agree with Russ on anything that matches a single criteria should
definitely be considered substantial. I did try (not very hard) to think
of some counter‐examples (those that I would consider insubstantial but
defined with a single criteria) but didn’t come up with any (other than
using ids which identify objects stored in the database), but after
devising my example for deciding when multiple nodes/ways start to
become substantial I do have some possibilities.
If we’re clear that “insubstantial” is anything that is not
“substantial”, then using that to help: I think a single primitive object
(node, way or relation) is insubstantial. However, a way is a list of
nodes, and a relation is collection of ways and nodes: When do they
these collections of objects become substantial?
I think definitely not until there is more than one object tagged (not
just created_by=) (though this in itself may not be considered
substantial). To try and explain:
* way 23644120 with its untagged nodes (256147816, 26431535,
21092669 and 21092665) is definitely insubstantial.
* way 4341611 with its nodes, some of which are tagged (26431528,
359721186, 310688016) as mini‐roundabouts is getting towards being
substantial (though I don’t think it is substantial, but illustrates
a minimum requirement for something to be considered substantial).
Using the same area that I randomly picked as an example (just
northeast of Shrewsbury), here are my opinions of what’s substantial and
1. way 23644120 (part of A49) — insubstantial
2. way 4341611 (potentially the whole of Sundorne Road), including
mini‐roundabouts — insubstantial
3. All ways that make up the A49 — unsure
4. All trunk and primary roads in the Sundorne Grove area — unsure
5. All highways in the Sundorne Grove area — unsure
6. All objects in the Sundorne Grove area — substantial
7. All highways in the Shrewsbury area — unsure
8. All objects in the Shrewsbury area — substantial
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the legal-talk